Years after ripping stars to shreds, 24 black holes suddenly flared up with radio waves in inexplicable 'burping' bouts. Half of all star-killing black holes may experience the same.
It doesn’t say “sucked into a black hole” it says “destroyed by a black hole”. It’s about stars which are torn apart by a blackhole’s gravity but not sucked in.
The first sentence of the body text in the article:
“Up to half of the black holes that devour stars “burp up” their stellar remains years later.”
I recognize that its not an entire sun being sucked in at once and that the black holes presence alone destroys the sun but the parts that are left. Radiation and what not should still be attracted to the black hole and assumingly orbit around its gravity before gething devoured.
It cant burp something out that was never inside. Or maybe it does but those implications are even more bizar. If it was just “burping out” the surrounding star stuff it wouldn’t be called a burp but “pushed it away again.
The top comment stating who discovered it was there yet when i made my initial comment where i was upfront that i may be looking to deep with my limited knowledge.
While i recognize that the discussion here has evolved with more nuance and smarter opinions you cant blame me for sticking with the original conversation which is the posted article. After all i am just respond to the replies i get i am not going to re-read the entire thread every time.
I also recognize that the first person to reply did say “According to the discoverer, this has nothing to do with the event horizon.”
But there was no source and i just read it as the “horizon has nothing to do with the burp” that doesn’t mean the twisted physics inside it do not.
You’re correct, but so is the person above. These stars are not (entirely) crossing the event horizon. Lots of material is left orbiting around the edge forming a disc. It’s this disc, the formation of it, and the ejection of material from it, that’s relevant here.
According to the discoverer, this has nothing to do with the event horizon.
When something gets sucked into a blackhole it needs to pas the event horizon.
It doesn’t say “sucked into a black hole” it says “destroyed by a black hole”. It’s about stars which are torn apart by a blackhole’s gravity but not sucked in.
The first sentence of the body text in the article:
“Up to half of the black holes that devour stars “burp up” their stellar remains years later.”
I recognize that its not an entire sun being sucked in at once and that the black holes presence alone destroys the sun but the parts that are left. Radiation and what not should still be attracted to the black hole and assumingly orbit around its gravity before gething devoured.
It cant burp something out that was never inside. Or maybe it does but those implications are even more bizar. If it was just “burping out” the surrounding star stuff it wouldn’t be called a burp but “pushed it away again.
How else am i to interpret this?
Maybe don’t read too much into the word choice of a non-technical article, and trust the actual astronomer discoverer talking about it?
The top comment stating who discovered it was there yet when i made my initial comment where i was upfront that i may be looking to deep with my limited knowledge.
While i recognize that the discussion here has evolved with more nuance and smarter opinions you cant blame me for sticking with the original conversation which is the posted article. After all i am just respond to the replies i get i am not going to re-read the entire thread every time.
I also recognize that the first person to reply did say “According to the discoverer, this has nothing to do with the event horizon.”
But there was no source and i just read it as the “horizon has nothing to do with the burp” that doesn’t mean the twisted physics inside it do not.
You’re correct, but so is the person above. These stars are not (entirely) crossing the event horizon. Lots of material is left orbiting around the edge forming a disc. It’s this disc, the formation of it, and the ejection of material from it, that’s relevant here.